Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
744 (and Others) FPM Descent Range At Touchdown  
User currently offlineSuseJ772 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 815 posts, RR: 1
Posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5953 times:

This may have been brought up, but I would be really curious as to what is the descent rate range at touchdown acceptable on a 744 (i.e. what is ideal to the maximum rate before damage to the landing gear).

I always thought touchdown was suppose to be 700 fpm, but I was talking with someone and they told me they thought 700 fpm was the descent rate from intercepting the glidescope until flare, but at actual touchdown you want to be going about 300 fpm?

I'd also be curious to know other aircraft types as well and how/why it differs between models.

P.S. I found this article Vertical Speed At Touchdown..., but it didn't answer the range, but only talked about the ideal VS


Currently at PIE, requesting FWA >> >>
21 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineChksix From Sweden, joined Sep 2005, 345 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5912 times:

The landing gear is certified by dropping it mounted in a rig from 30 ft at max weight and max speed. That would be similar to a stall and drop to the runway just after takeoff.

They showed the A380 MLG being tested in this way on tv a while ago.



The conveyor belt plane will fly
User currently offlineFlyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 5906 times:

In the CRJ, typical touchdowns are in the 200-300 fpm range. Really depends on the specific landing, pilot technique, etc. At my airline, aything over 600fpm requires a hard landing inspection prior to its next flight.

User currently offline3DPlanes From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 167 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 5877 times:

Quoting Chksix (Reply 1):
dropping it mounted in a rig from 30 ft

If my mind isn't failing me, d = 1/2at^2, and v=at

Solving for t, gives 1.37 seconds to go 30 ft. With v at impact equal to 2630 feet per minute.

Given those numbers (and assuming my math is right) - it almost seems conservative to check at a value as low as 600 fpm...



"Simplicate and add lightness." - Ed Heinemann
User currently offlineSuseJ772 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 815 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 5865 times:

Quoting 3DPlanes (Reply 3):
Solving for t, gives 1.37 seconds to go 30 ft. With v at impact equal to 2630 feet per minute.

I am not sure what all the variables stand for (d, a, t) but your math is quite interesting. I am wondering now from the pilots on the forum what their "hardest" landing they can remember was?

Also, I am curious as to what ranges of hard landings pilots have had that after check have yielded no problems and what has yielded problems - or where was the threshold that on their type seems to produce a problem in the real world (not just mathematically speaking).



Currently at PIE, requesting FWA >> >>
User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 5856 times:

On the 744, 600 FPM is the value that will satisfy the on board monitoring system. If it's above that then there's an "event" that will trigger an analysis of the ACMS function of the CMC.

Generally, the touchdown VVI you have at touchdown is in the vicinity of 200-300 FPM. Touchdown in that range and you will have a comfortable touchdown within the required touchdown area on the runway.


User currently offlineChksix From Sweden, joined Sep 2005, 345 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 5834 times:

I have to add here that the 30 ft height was a guess, it may have been higher. The gear assembly is so big on that plane that it makes judging scale difficult  Smile


The conveyor belt plane will fly
User currently offlineTristarSteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 3999 posts, RR: 34
Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 5780 times:

A little storey here about what can go wrong.

Many years ago, the Royal Air Force decided to try out the autoland on their newly acquired Tristar.. They had not been trained on autoland, but found out later that the tech log entry stating that autoland was not available was not just a training issue, but backed up by several pulled and collared circuit breakers. The collision with the ground threw the mighty L1011 back into the air, and also broke the wing main spar and punctured the fuel tanks in many places. Five tonnes of fuel was lost during the following circuit and manual landing.
So don't forget to flare!


User currently offlineCedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8088 posts, RR: 54
Reply 8, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 5731 times:

Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 7):
Many years ago, the Royal Air Force decided to try out the autoland on their newly acquired Tristar.. They had not been trained on autoland, but found out later that the tech log entry stating that autoland was not available was not just a training issue, but backed up by several pulled and collared circuit breakers. The collision with the ground threw the mighty L1011 back into the air, and also broke the wing main spar and punctured the fuel tanks in many places. Five tonnes of fuel was lost during the following circuit and manual landing.

So they just let it fall onto the runway from circuit height, thinking it was being flown by the computer?! Oh man. Government work. What can you say?!



fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineCitationJet From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2432 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 5721 times:

Landing gear on commercial aircraft certified to Part 25 criteria. The landing gear limit (once in a lifetime) load is 10 feet per second at the maximum landing weight and 6 feet per second at the maximum takeoff weight per FAR 25.473. In addition the gear is tested to a reserve energy requirement (ultimate load case) of 12 feet per second. At 12 feet per second at max landing weight, the tires can blow, and the structure can permanently deform, but the landing gear cannot break.


Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 5712 times:

Quoting CitationJet (Reply 9):
Landing gear on commercial aircraft certified to Part 25 criteria. The landing gear limit (once in a lifetime) load is 10 feet per second at the maximum landing weight and 6 feet per second at the maximum takeoff weight per FAR 25.473. In addition the gear is tested to a reserve energy requirement (ultimate load case) of 12 feet per second. At 12 feet per second at max landing weight, the tires can blow, and the structure can permanently deform, but the landing gear cannot break.

Citation Jet is correct. 6 feet per second (300 feet per minute) is the desired sink rate for landing. I was involved with the RAF incident TriStar Steve described (in Reply 7) and the sink rate in that incident was calculated as being about 18 feet per second.


User currently offlineFredT From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 2185 posts, RR: 26
Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 5668 times:

Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 8):
So they just let it fall onto the runway from circuit height, thinking it was being flown by the computer?! Oh man. Government work. What can you say?!

Squawk: "Autoland touchdown rough"
Writeoff: "Autoland not installed on this aircraft"



I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
User currently offlineCitationJet From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2432 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 5664 times:

During certification testing of the MD-80 landing distance performance testing was conducted. Due to a high descent rate landing, the vertical tail separated from the aircraft. The aircraft was heavily instrumented, therefore much information was known about the performance parameters. The aircraft landed 2,500 lb above the max landing weight at 125 KIAS, with a descent rate of 990 feet per minute (16.5 fps) based on the on board instrumentation on the experimental aircraft (page 6 of NTSB report).


Here is what a 16.5 ft per second landing looks like!!!!!!!!!
Link to video of landing:
http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...y=dc-9+crash+landing&search=Search

Link to NTSB report of the accident:
http://www.alexisparkinn.com/Photoga...lery2/MD80_NTSBReport/AAR82-02.pdf

.

[Edited 2007-02-11 20:51:48]

[Edited 2007-02-11 21:04:32]


Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
User currently offlineSuseJ772 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 815 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 5582 times:

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 5):
On the 744, 600 FPM is the value that will satisfy the on board monitoring system.


Knowing that cracks me up now that I realize the error in my FlightSim practice. I had always been shooting for a 700 FPM at touchdown, and then obviously would have harder landings from time to time at about 1300-1500 FPM. I'll have to work on my flare  wink 



Currently at PIE, requesting FWA >> >>
User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5548 times:

I may be remembering this incorrectly, but I'm sure I read that for the 737 at least, it's possible to get the descent rate too low.

Something to do with the wheels not spinning up and therefore flat-spotting the tyres.

Quoting SuseJ772:
Knowing that cracks me up now that I realize the error in my FlightSim practice.

I don't know if you've ever tried FSPassengers, but a touchdown rate that high (700FPM) will earn you some choice words from your copilot and will require some expensive maint. The pax also complain, ("-200 points. Excessive descent rate. Passengers wondered if they had been shot down").



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineFredT From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 2185 posts, RR: 26
Reply 15, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5499 times:

Quoting BAe146QT (Reply 14):
I may be remembering this incorrectly, but I'm sure I read that for the 737 at least, it's possible to get the descent rate too low.

Something to do with the wheels not spinning up and therefore flat-spotting the tyres.

On a wet runway you want a firm touchdown. This will push the tyres through the water/slush on the runway and decrease the risk of aquaplaning. I doubt you could ever flat spot tires from skidding them along the runway without touching down. They'd spin up allright. The friction working on creating a flat spot is the same friction working on getting the tyre spinning.

Aquaplaning can cause rubber reversion though. This can damage the tyre, much like locking the wheel, and is probably the source behind what you heard.

Edit: An excessively smooth touchdown can delay the activation of the weight on wheels switch. This can, depending on the aircraft and the function of its systems, cause secondary effects.

Rgds,
/Fred

[Edited 2007-02-12 19:32:27]


I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5469 times:

Thank you Fred. Probably more due to my faulty memory than anything else.


Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5359 times:

Incidentally, I just came across this;

[begin fair use]

Quote:
Unfortunately the 737-700 was particularly prone to a dramatic shudder from the main landing gear if you tried to land smoothly. Fortunately Boeing started fitting shimmy dampers to this series from L/N 406 (Nov 1999) and a retrofit was made available.

[/fair use]
(from http://www.b737.org.uk/landinggear.htm)

Obviously specific to a particular airframe, but I thought it interesting that there is another reason why you might want a firm touchdown.


P.s. Don't know if the owner of that site posts here, but it's brilliant - thank you.



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineProk From Netherlands, joined May 2005, 36 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 5311 times:

Quoting SuseJ772 (Thread starter):
someone and they told me they thought 700 fpm was the descent rate from intercepting the glidescope until flare

On the 744 the descent rate will be around 900 fpm on the glideslope.


User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 5289 times:

Quoting Prok:
On the 744 the descent rate will be around 900 fpm on the glideslope.

I think the problem was that Suse was confusing descent rate on approach with the rate of descent at touchdown.  Wink

And in post 14, I made the mistake of not explicitly differentiating either - but that is what I meant!



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineSpeedracer1407 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 333 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 5250 times:

Quoting FredT (Reply 15):
Edit: An excessively smooth touchdown can delay the activation of the weight on wheels switch. This can, depending on the aircraft and the function of its systems, cause secondary effects.

We all know it's hard identify the causes of unfamiliar situations while onboard as a passenger, but I feel like this may have happened on the last flight I took from ORD to my connection in IAH.

During the flare, the pilot seemed to arrest the sinkrate completely. I had a good look at the wings, and the pilot had the ailerons flapping up and down while we floated for quite a while. I'm sure I felt the gear touch the ground EVER so lightly a good few seconds before the spoilers deployed. Normally, and on all three other legs of my roundtrip flight, we touched firmly, and the spoilers deployed upon the instant of touchdown.

As an aside, this landing was amusing to me because of how heavy handed the pilot seemed to handle the plane (understandably) druing our taxi and takeoff from ORD during the snowstorm on tuesday afternoon.



Dassault Mercure: the plane that has Boeing and Airbus shaking in their boots.
User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 5234 times:

Quoting Speedracer1407:
I had a good look at the wings, and the pilot had the ailerons flapping up and down while we floated for quite a while.

I had a similar experience on a 757 landing at Lanzarote. My perception was that the pilot was "feeling for the runway" with the left main gear. On reflection, it was probably just crosswinds.



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic 744 (and Others) FPM Descent Range At Touchdown
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Off-wing Slides And Others In Enclosures posted Wed Mar 22 2006 18:19:55 by Doktor
Door Seals On MD-88 And Others posted Fri Nov 19 2004 06:48:55 by Monorail
V1 And V2 During Take Off At Roll posted Mon Jun 14 2004 13:26:14 by Alphasierra
Who Owns And Operates The Storage Area At VCV? posted Thu Nov 20 2003 15:33:31 by Flybulldog
744 And A388 Water Evac posted Sun Jun 22 2003 05:20:51 by Boeing4ever
Soviet Jet Sounds And Others posted Wed Mar 26 2003 20:11:13 by Sovietjet
Vertical Speed At Touchdown... posted Thu Oct 3 2002 17:09:33 by USAFHummer
Ldg Gear Sideloads At Touchdown posted Sat Jan 26 2002 21:33:24 by Cdfmxtech
Leading Edge Of 744 And 743 posted Fri Apr 13 2001 10:29:58 by Cathay pacific
744 Range Numbers: How And Why posted Sun Mar 2 2003 16:54:25 by BOEING747400

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format